Cargando…

Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly used to treat painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). At the time of a recent meta-analysis in this field, data were only available from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS). However, outcomes from high-frequency 10 kH...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoelzer, Bryan C., Edgar, Deborah, Lu, Shiao-Ping, Taylor, Rod S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9599433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36289892
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102630
_version_ 1784816592881713152
author Hoelzer, Bryan C.
Edgar, Deborah
Lu, Shiao-Ping
Taylor, Rod S.
author_facet Hoelzer, Bryan C.
Edgar, Deborah
Lu, Shiao-Ping
Taylor, Rod S.
author_sort Hoelzer, Bryan C.
collection PubMed
description Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly used to treat painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). At the time of a recent meta-analysis in this field, data were only available from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS). However, outcomes from high-frequency 10 kHz SCS treatment are now available. Our study aimed to systematically review the contemporary evidence for SCS in patients with lower limb pain due to PDN and include an indirect comparison of the high- and low-frequency modalities. We searched the PubMed/CENTRAL databases up to 18 August 2022, for peer-reviewed RCTs of SCS that enrolled PDN patients with lower limb pain symptoms. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Using SCS treatment arm data from the RCTs, we indirectly compared the absolute treatment effect of 10 kHz SCS and LF-SCS. Results are presented in tables and forest plots. This systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Three RCTs met our eligibility criteria, including the recent 10 kHz SCS RCT (N = 216, 90 implanted) and 2 others that examined LF-SCS (N = 36, 17 implanted; N = 60, 37 implanted). Our analysis of 6-month data found clinically meaningful pain relief with each SCS modality. However, significantly greater pain reduction was identified for 10 kHz SCS over LF-SCS: average pain reduction in the 10 kHz SCS cohort was 73.7% compared with 47.5% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p < 0.0001). In the permanent implant subset, the 50% pain reduction responder rate was 83.3% in the 10 kHz SCS cohort versus 63.0% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p = 0.0072). The overall risk of bias of each included RCT was deemed high, mainly due to the absence of patient blinding. Our analysis indicates that paresthesia-free 10 kHz SCS can provide superior pain relief and responder rate over LF-SCS for managing PDN patients refractory to conventional medical management.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9599433
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95994332022-10-27 Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials Hoelzer, Bryan C. Edgar, Deborah Lu, Shiao-Ping Taylor, Rod S. Biomedicines Systematic Review Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly used to treat painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). At the time of a recent meta-analysis in this field, data were only available from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS). However, outcomes from high-frequency 10 kHz SCS treatment are now available. Our study aimed to systematically review the contemporary evidence for SCS in patients with lower limb pain due to PDN and include an indirect comparison of the high- and low-frequency modalities. We searched the PubMed/CENTRAL databases up to 18 August 2022, for peer-reviewed RCTs of SCS that enrolled PDN patients with lower limb pain symptoms. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Using SCS treatment arm data from the RCTs, we indirectly compared the absolute treatment effect of 10 kHz SCS and LF-SCS. Results are presented in tables and forest plots. This systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Three RCTs met our eligibility criteria, including the recent 10 kHz SCS RCT (N = 216, 90 implanted) and 2 others that examined LF-SCS (N = 36, 17 implanted; N = 60, 37 implanted). Our analysis of 6-month data found clinically meaningful pain relief with each SCS modality. However, significantly greater pain reduction was identified for 10 kHz SCS over LF-SCS: average pain reduction in the 10 kHz SCS cohort was 73.7% compared with 47.5% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p < 0.0001). In the permanent implant subset, the 50% pain reduction responder rate was 83.3% in the 10 kHz SCS cohort versus 63.0% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p = 0.0072). The overall risk of bias of each included RCT was deemed high, mainly due to the absence of patient blinding. Our analysis indicates that paresthesia-free 10 kHz SCS can provide superior pain relief and responder rate over LF-SCS for managing PDN patients refractory to conventional medical management. MDPI 2022-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9599433/ /pubmed/36289892 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102630 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Hoelzer, Bryan C.
Edgar, Deborah
Lu, Shiao-Ping
Taylor, Rod S.
Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort indirect comparison of 10 khz spinal cord stimulation (scs) versus traditional low-frequency scs for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9599433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36289892
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102630
work_keys_str_mv AT hoelzerbryanc indirectcomparisonof10khzspinalcordstimulationscsversustraditionallowfrequencyscsforthetreatmentofpainfuldiabeticneuropathyasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT edgardeborah indirectcomparisonof10khzspinalcordstimulationscsversustraditionallowfrequencyscsforthetreatmentofpainfuldiabeticneuropathyasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT lushiaoping indirectcomparisonof10khzspinalcordstimulationscsversustraditionallowfrequencyscsforthetreatmentofpainfuldiabeticneuropathyasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT taylorrods indirectcomparisonof10khzspinalcordstimulationscsversustraditionallowfrequencyscsforthetreatmentofpainfuldiabeticneuropathyasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials